At this rate, between North Korea, Charlottesville and the climate crisis, it's unclear if America can survive being too much "greater", as the political cartoonists in PDiddie's latest weekly collection illustrate...

Just three days before the November mid-terms --- and for no particular reason, other than it seemed "reasonable" --- Comedy Central's tag-team news/satire team Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert will hold rallies on the mall in Washington D.C.

Game changers? Or just a really really good time? Or both? We'll see. Here are their rather hilarious competing announcements from last night in case you missed them (each coming after a false start in both cases)...

UPDATE 9/19/10:Glenn Greenwald offers a cogent analysis of the "false equivalency" seen in Stewart's intro to his event which suggests a comparison between baseless extremist cries from the Right that "Obama is a socialist who wasn't born in the U.S. and hates America" to the very real cries from the Left for accountability in the case of alleged war crimes committed by the Bush Administration, as cited directly by the U.S. Army general who led the investigation into prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib...

"After years of disclosures by government investigations, media accounts and reports from human rights organizations, there is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes," [Maj. Gen. Antonio] Taguba wrote [in his report]. "The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account."

Greenwald goes on to conclude:

The claim that Bush is "a war criminal" has ample basis, and it's deeply irresponsible to try to declare this discussion off-limits, or lump it in with a whole slew of baseless right-wing accusatory rhetoric, in order to establish one's centrist bona fides.

It's admirable to want to apply the same standards to both sides, but straining to manufacture false equivalencies doesn't accomplish that; sometimes, honestly applying the same standards to each side will result in a finding that one side, at least in that regard, is actually worse. When that's the case, a person engaged in truly independent, non-ideological inquiry --- rather than the pretense of such --- will expressly acknowledge the imbalance, not concoct an equivalency where it doesn't exist. By stark contrast, Stephen Colbert's "March to Keep Fear Alive" seems extremely well-focused and on-point.

Political cartoonist and blogger Tom Tomorrow tweeted this morning in response that false equivalency has always been "Jon Stewart's achilles hell", to which we responded in kind that, indeed, this is the area where Stewart, unfortunately, "still suffers from MSM's Disease."

I am fully comforted in the knowledge that my Raison d'etre is manifest, at last. Finally grateful for the odd, conflicted, stupid, heretofore seemingly incongruous timing of my birth. I'm so juicy and restored I may even do some sit-ups later and mean them...

Organizing to meet up there with some Florida EI peeps; some out of Tampa / St. Pete maybe getting a bus. Anyone on West Coast of FL need a ride? For more info feel free to contact me @:www.jeanniedean.com

Since it's being billed as "the rally for people who don't have time for rallies", everyone should go. I bet we can get bigger numbers out than Beck's Gods and Horns, disgusting Bullhooey, Pissing, Patsy-pawn, Puppet-throngs of Zombie-Retirees.

Brad, I wonder if there is some way of making the embed code switch if it is a Canada ip viewing your site? It is really annoying to get the "In Canada, Comedy Central Videos are available on, 'The Comedy Network'" then trying to search all over the place over there to find it. VERY annoying.

We have to use
CTV owns the rights to all Comedy Central programs unfortunately. (Hide your ip and you can see Comedy Central outside Canada)

I'm sick of having to find ways of hiding my IP. They should set it up differently, instead of inconveniencing users.

Why don't those mo'f's sort it out? If they can have an annoying message like "In Canada, Comedy Central Videos are available on, 'The Comedy Network'" showing up for Canadians, then they can instead have it switch to the g*dam* corresponding embed code of "The Comedy Network." The way they do it now is bloody annoying.

Brian, if you consider what he said, you will realize that in a very subtle way, he supports us. "911 was an OUTSIDE job" ??? He's in a roundabout way, I think, putting the T-partiers, in the same category as the ones believing it was as whooping it up over the attacks of that day, by believing the official story. In other words the sane ones are the ones recognizing it was an inside job.

I think you are hoping. I also think that it was that attitude that elected such an obvious phony as Obama. (Though that is not an attack on you specifically or your voting history specifically, because I don't know your voting history.) I just see it differently.

Hope for the best, but plan for the worst. I hope Colbert has bigger balls than Stewart when discussing real issues like what happened on 9/11.

Glad to see everyone else sees right through the media control, even for such false left-idols as Stewart, Colbert or the arrogant Maher.

Heh....silly me, I thought Jon was being ironic there and making his "reasonableness" rally actually extreme --- Extremely reasonable that is...kinda steering us to find an actual middle ground between the two of them crazies.

But that was probably my foolish optimism and unwillingness to see the corporate invisible hand at work even on Jon Stewart himself.

Brian, I know, so many measures have been taken to marginalize the Truth community, the ANTI-truth community, if you will, one might expect, yet another blow, it leaves those like Colbert and Stewart in a position in which, losing their jobs would be a blow to many strides the Left has made, he helps keep the ball rolling, like our dear Brad here, expose, expose. expose the bastards. Expose that they are basically fascists, by tactics used.

One of the problems interfering with the Truth Community's goal of alerting all of what has taken place, is the incapacity for most (at first, at least) to fathom it. All need to be made aware. Then what? I don't even know if voting is going to change anything. Well, to make a long story short...Neutral is the best that Stewart and Colbert could come to, still, not losing their jobs. By throwing the "outside job" shoe in the gears of the topic's questions, he doesn't particularly endorse either side.

Any person that has a scintilla of objectivity, and honestly seen the ample evidence knows, and I'm sure, intelligence and objectivity as well as a brilliant sense of humor has been the cornerstone of Stewart's and Colbert's remarkable successes.

I don't think they honestly could endorse the government side, which would be striking at us, verbally. I think it was a joke to divert it, Not saying inside job, that joke kept him from really saying anything, I believe. They both know, I'm sure. And, they are very valuable for Progressives. We don't want them to be gone from the networks. Fathoming the criminality rampant, we need folks on TV too that make that possible, to think out, beyond what the Fascist folks spittle. Maybe then, others grasping the otherwise unthinkable act that has taken place, others may begin to grasp a step beyond the level of evil, that those like Stewart, Colbert, Brad here, and others, like Palast even, so important to bring many to a level of understanding, that they can then comprehend, later, then yet more, not quite such a stretch, that other level to grasp, of criminality, that which we have seen. Baby steps I guess, I'm saying for some. Let's not be mad at John Stewart or Stephen Colbert. They are important for us too.

I'd be there with both my grown children but it's scheduled for Halloween weekend! I've got six grand kids and Halloween is a BIG BIG thing in our community. I've got a feeling that I'm not alone in this regard. Whoever came up with the date for this needs to be fired. Seems to me the need is for Stewart's/Colbert's rally to be BIGGER than Beck's. If it's smaller then everybody that shows up might as well wear a big "L" on their back for the media to showcase.

I have a coupla problems with your delivery(problems I've had with others writing comments here from the Truth movement).

1. You speak to us as if we are all of one hive mind of denial. I believe that is inaccurate and inappropriate. It seems to me there is a range of views here on this subject. I, for instance, am of the view(and I'm certain this view is shared by at least a few others here) that regarding what transpired in New York on 9/11/01 there's much that has not been accounted for, I'd really like to see some credible accounting of it all, I am not inclined to jump on either the "official" version of events bandwagon or the "Truthers'" certainty of reality bandwagon, thank you very much. I need to know more than either the government or you has offered so far. I say this having spent some time looking. The government's side explains next to nothing. Your side brings up interesting points and questions that absolutely need looking into. I would very much like them looked into. But I can make up more than the one explanation you seem to embrace as the absolutely correct and only one that could possibly explain everything. For instance, if if was an inside job, is it inconceivable that it was done by some private, separate from the government person or group? How can anyone know the answer to that or any number of other possible explanatory scenarios without more info? In any case, I feel that I, for one, can not.

This does not make me unaware of the completely horseshit rationales for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It does not make me unaware of the constant manipulation of reality by Republicans, Democrats, and most everyone in the MSM. It does not make me unaware on the unimaginable suffering of hundreds of thousands(more likely millions) of Iraqis, Afghanis, and the millions of others across the globe affected by our engulf and devour in the name of freedom mentality.

2. For me, lumping Maddow and Stewart in with O'Reilly and Beck is taking false equivalencies to the outer reaches of the galaxy. Maddow and Stewart connect a ton of the dots. And they do so consistently, clearly, and often hilariously(mostly Stewart on the hilariously). O'Reilly, and to an even greater degree Beck, are not really in the clarification or informing the citizenry business. For my money Maddow, Stewart, and Colbert most definitely are. This does not mean I agree with everything they say. Sometimes they miss something important by a lot and I want to shake them. They are human, they screw up. But by and large, to me, they are national treasures.

3. I am sympathetic to what I think is your feeling of--if only everyone knew the truth about this...I have that thought/feeling regarding so many subjects--the shortsightedness, dangers, and unsustainability of both the genetic manipulation and industrialization of our food supply; the shortsightedness, dangers, and unsustainability of our over-fishing, over-poisoning, over-warming, over-garbaging of our oceans; the completely dysfunctional and undemocratic nature of our election systems. I could go on, but I trust you get the idea. My point here is that your very real concerns have not cornered the market on the pain, frustration, and longing of--if only everybody knew this, things would be different.

Dave, there is alot to learn. Much has been documented now as true in the Truth Community. I suggest you start catching a few more videos.There is more evidence of the government lyiong and the connections as to who did major elevator renovations. (Bush knows him well) This has quite a few documentaries. There are plenty more answers than you know. There are dozens and dozens of websites, internationally even, but it can be overwhelming. Some are powerful though. Go to:

I would like to address your concerns as a chance for myself to learn as well.

You ask in question 1:

But I can make up more than the one explanation you seem to embrace as the absolutely correct and only one that could possibly explain everything. For instance, if if was an inside job, is it inconceivable that it was done by some private, separate from the government person or group? How can anyone know the answer to that or any number of other possible explanatory scenarios without more info? In any case, I feel that I, for one, can not.

If you have studied the collaspe of World Trade Center #7, and stopped listening to propaganda that says don't look into World Trade Center #7, than you may feel comfortable seeing, and saying, a controlled demolition was) taking place.

Once you know this, than you have to look at why all 3 buildings would not be rigged with some sort of explosives. The nature of their collapse seems to be more in support of a controlled demolition and explosive nature than a "gravitiational collapse" offered by NIST.

I think you see that though, right?

So the question is who? Well, many people are trying to tackle that question, but some aren't.

For me, lumping Maddow and Stewart in with O'Reilly and Beck is taking false equivalencies to the outer reaches of the galaxy. Maddow and Stewart connect a ton of the dots. And they do so consistently, clearly, and often hilariously(mostly Stewart on the hilariously). O'Reilly, and to an even greater degree Beck, are not really in the clarification or informing the citizenry business. For my money Maddow, Stewart, and Colbert most definitely are. This does not mean I agree with everything they say. Sometimes they miss something important by a lot and I want to shake them. They are human, they screw up. But by and large, to me, they are national treasures.

It is easily seen that anyone who watches Beck and OReilly would say the exact same thing.

I worry that we may be over looking such indisputable CIA operations as "Mockingbird" and other similar PR stunts, campaigns, and agendas.

Hilarious is good, but we are in deep shit, and its getting deeper. People are making excuses for their idols and "jesters" of the courts, while we are being robbed of every woking hour we put in to the system.

If Jon Stewart can't offer 9/11 truth freely and objectively, tha he is not free nor objective, and should not be followed as such.

Same for all on MSM including Beck, OReilly,Maddow, and Olberman.

Just the way I see it after all this time. It has been almost a DECADE after all!

My point here is that your very real concerns have not cornered the market on the pain, frustration, and longing of--if only everybody knew this, things would be different.

That could be because 9/11 is so obvious, so blatent and so big that the true nature our woes might have a chance of being exposed!!!! In essence, we can name names and put people in prison for treason and high crimes!

This is no joke and has not been done for quite some time. It might also then ripple and help our other concerns that you expressed as well in remark 3:

the shortsightedness, dangers, and unsustainability of both the genetic manipulation and industrialization of our food supply; the shortsightedness, dangers, and unsustainability of our over-fishing, over-poisoning, over-warming, over-garbaging of our oceans; the completely dysfunctional and undemocratic nature of our election systems

You are right about that. But please note the EXTRA care ALL the media expouses on trashing 9/11 truth. It is not just 2 of the 4 Networks, it is all 4 of the Networks trashing 9/11 "truth".

On @24, I have a different view. My method(that I aspire to, anyway, if not always successful in employing)is to judge each subject, each utterance by its own integrity, worth, sense, etc. You never know where truth might come from. I try not to write anyone off completely for all time. This does not mean I don't "consider the source." I do. And a source's track record on getting something right is important. I just mean that I try to stay open to argument and different points of view and try to do my homework to be able to deconstruct with information, facts, reason, and history the nonsense of Beck, O'Reilly, and anyone else.

That said, Maddow and Stewart for the most part make a helluva lot of sense to me. I crave the kind of sense they provide. Much like your feelings about how things would change if people knew the truth about 9/11, I feel things would change more if more people watched Maddow, Stewart, and Colbert. It's weird but as far as the news goes, for my money, our most consistently reliable sources are a lesbian and two comedians. I think that's hilarious and weird and amazing. So I rail at them when I feel they're missing a big one, but mostly applaud and cheer their integrity and intelligence.

On your #25, I think you're completely missing me. When you say--

That could be because 9/11 is so obvious, so blatent and so big that the true nature our woes might have a chance of being exposed!!!!--that's exactly my point about the other subjects I referred to.

My feeling is that if people knew the truth about the oceans, our food supply, our media, our election systems,etc., it very well might get the ball rolling in helping connect the dots and make it easier to see the dysfunction/lies in all the other places.

I'm suggesting that our cultural group deep sleep applies to all these subjects. Our fear, ignorance, denial, and constant misinformation inform and nurture them all. It's a consciousness issue that your movement does not have proprietary rights over. The unconsciousness is spread around rather generously, as far as I can tell.

That's why I say all the work to reveal ALL the largely unknown truths is vital work.

The Dems are getting worried about the rally because people are going to be going to it the weekend before the election instead of knocking on door and manning phone banks. I say so what.

The Dem establishment keeps whining that progressives should shut up about expecting more from a Dem controlled Congress and White House. I am sick of hearing that we should be like Republicans and fall into line no matter how pissed we are at them for not doing what they promised or insinuated they would do.
They made their decisions over the past 20 months and now they have to deal with the consequences (an apathetic voter base). Yes a Republican win would make their jobs harder if not impossible, but since they haven't been doing their jobs very well, I don't see any reason to reward them with continued support. If the Dems can't win with a splintered Republican party that is showing their radical side, then maybe we should look for another party to represent us, or at least shed the establishment dead weight that is preventing real reform.

(That is assuming the elections are not rigged, as we all know they are). If the Dems are not willing to enforce election laws when they are in control then that is a strong sign they are at minimum enabling and at worst contributing to the problems of election fraud/rigging. Why continue supporting a party that only cares about power and not about true elections and the issues they have relegated to talking points?

Brian @ 23
Couldn't agree with you more. I was asleep until 2006. First viewing of WTC 7 going down - "Wow, that was impossible". Why hadn't I seen it before. Obvious controlled demolition. Next, re-look at the other two towers. Those weren't collapses, they were explosive demolitions. Who did it? Don't know, but usually it's the cover-up that winds up exposing the true culprits.

Dave, thanks for working with A&E !!! What I think the A & E point, specifically the words of Gage, is that the only thing confirmed are the facts, which will be presented. THEORIZING is to be rejected.

So, considering all the facts point to the government, many of us can't help but assume it was the government involved, but A and E makes clear, that it will study, confirm evidence only, and "let the chips fall where they may" were Richard Gage's words.

For any one reading here that thinks it's sketchy, the facts compiled by professionals, it's not sketchy. The evidence of government lying is hard evidence, and there is plenty of it, not to mention ample evidence confirming demolitions in all three building.

I don't know what A&E are. Don't know what you mean by thanking me for working with them. Did you mean to write that to me? Would like to say your welcome, but don't know what that would mean as I don't know what you're talking about, yet.